Posted
by
BeauHDon Monday March 27, 2017 @06:50PM
from the code-of-conduct dept.

An anonymous Slashdot reader writes: Last week the Drupal community erupted in anger after its leader, Dries Buytaert, asked Larry Garfield, a prominent Drupal contributor and long-time member of the Drupal and PHP communities, "to leave the Drupal project." Buytaert claims he did this "because it came to my attention that he holds views that are in opposition with the values of the Drupal project." A huge furor has erupted in response -- not least because the reason clearly has much to do with Garfield's unconventional sex life. [Garfield is into BDSM, and is a member of the Gorean community, "a community who are interested in, and/or participate in, elaborate sexual subjugation fantasies, in which men are inherently superior to women."] Buytaert made his post (which is now offline) in response after Larry went public, outing himself to public opinion. Buytaert retorted (excerpt available via TechCrunch): "when a highly-visible community member's private views become public, controversial, and disruptive for the project, I must consider the impact [...] all people are created equally. [sic] I cannot in good faith support someone who actively promotes a philosophy that is contrary to this [...] any association with Larry's belief system is inconsistent with our project's goals [...] I recused myself from the Drupal Association's decision [to dismiss Garfield from his conference role] [...] Many have rightfully stated that I haven't made a clear case for the decision [...] I did not make the decision based on the information or beliefs conveyed in Larry's blog post." TechCrunch columnist Jon Evans goes on to "unpack" the questions that naturally arise from these "Code of Conduct conflicts."

Is it? Suppose, he was into homo rather than heterosexual subjugation... Do you suppose, they would've banished him just as well — even if he were open about it?

Sorry, short forum posts don't lend themselves to nuances - I meant fair game for people knowing. If you choose to make it public you do so aware of how society might react (regardless of the wrongs and rights of the reaction), but in this case it sounds like he was "outed" against his will.

Looks like someone hates being called to account for being a dickBecause, honestly, that is all the Social JUSTICE workers ever do

You must know different social justice warriors than I do. I've been called to account for lots of perfectly innocent statements. Statements that it's easy to misrepresent: statements that are excellent fodder for virtue signalling. On the other hand, when I'm actually being a dick (whether justified or not, by accident or on purpose), nobody calls me out. Because it's not easy to deliver true criticism.

There is also a gap in what a persons fantasy life is vs what they publicly say and do. Ones fantasy life may not be inline with their own values. I am sure most of us has some sexual fetish that others will find distasteful. And we well know if we fully try to find our fantasy it will be just impractical.This is the problem on spying on people and digging up dirt on them. They find something then extrapolate an intention that isn't based on reality.

It looks like everyone not fully embracing the SJW agenda is being purged in tech and entertainment industries in the wake of the Trump hysteria. People thought Tim Allen was crazy for joking to Jimmy Kimmel that being even a moderate conservative in Hollywood was starting to feel like being a Jew in 1930's Germany. But he wasn't just shooting his mouth off. One of the first things the Nazis did with Jews was ban them from most employment.

Politics has been becoming increasingly polarized for quite some time now. Trump's nomination and election is part of that trend, but it was certainly not the start of it. Unfortunately, people in the middle get attacked from both sides.

No, it's not new. Americans have been acting like this for a long time with all that puritan outrage bullshit despite being the land of commercial sleaze.

It's not new, but what is (fairly) new is that it's now coming from the nominally "liberal" and "progressive" political spectrum in America. It's the Horseshoe effect [wikipedia.org]. Same reason many people on both sides of the political spectrum oppose prostitution: conservatives oppose it because they believe exploiting women for sex is immoral, and liberals because... well, actually, the exact same thing, really.

Both are basing their beliefs on an outside standard. The only issue is whether the liberal or conservative reason is correct.

You are also conflating 'conservative' with 'religious'. To do so is to ignore the conservative tradition articulated by Roger Scruton, who, to hopelessly oversimplify, argues that what has been done in the past is a pattern which is likely to be good in itself, whose rejection is inherently bad to some extent. I.e Cultural practices emerge and define a community, and to destroy them

And yet when women do it they get high fives for being strong and independent. Truth be told, at least his kink involves just subjugating women that are into it rather than subjugating an entire gender the way that typical American women do it.

We're just in a weird transitionatory state. Women just finally starting to have a voice. Weird edges cases like this will get more voice than they should. Sex is weird, what turns people on varies. As long as he found someone else in an agreeable consenting position, I don't see what the issue was. Sounds like he screwed up keeping his personal life seperate from his professional. That can be difficult for someone not in a committed relationship and could happen to anyone. I feel sorry for him:(

If your sex life involves subjugation of a sub-class of people anywhere, in this case women generally

Notwithstanding the "victimstance" which of which privilege so bitterly complains (on which point I agree with you)... Mr Garfield's sex life does not involve subjugation of women generally. However seriously the Goreans like to take themselves, it involves acting out the subjugation fantasies with a particular subset of consenting women who similarly get their rocks off from playing this game. Women who, no less than the man in question, have every right to pursue their sexual fulfillment. The Gorean discourse, much like the 'female supremacy' discourse within branches of femdom, should be understood, not as serious social analysis, but as a prop to fantasy. Until Goreans move from getting each other's rocks off to implementing their fantasies as social policy that discourse need not concern the rest of us.

It's fantasy role play. It doesn't mean they actually believe or would act in real life on that stuff. At least I hope not. Not all of them anyway. My guess is if there isn't allowed to be a controlled outlet for a person's needs it would fester until they can't control it. We need people to be able to quasi-experience their harmless fantasies without repercussions or harming others. Where that is not possible we have to provide them with mental health services. Otherwise their brains may scramble even more and they may end up doing something harmful not just to themselves but to others. Hey it sucks but there isn't any other option.

It's fantasy role play. It doesn't mean they actually believe or would act in real life on that stuff. At least I hope not. Not all of them anyway.

There's both kinds among the Goreans. And on a personal, anecdotal level, all the Gorean men I've met were complete assholes, but that doesn't prove anything. Maybe I just met the worst ones, right? Ha ha ha.

It is certainly possible to engage in BDSM in ways which are not harmful, and determining which kind someone is doing remotely is nontrivial. On the other hand, equality is a tenet of all modern civilizations with good reason. And I've known people who were into BDSM who were definitely not healthy. Like, people who harmed themselves or even killed themselves eventually because they felt unwanted or unfulfilled. Were these people ever participating in a healthy way, or were they just lying to themselves?

I'm not trying to draw a line beyond which things are definitely unhealthy, but if it looks and smells and in all other ways seems unhealthy, odds are good. I've known people in long-term relationships to be pushed way beyond what they actually wanted simply because they didn't know how to say no, and there's no shortage of scrupulous fuckers out there who claim to be responsible members of the scene but are neither safe, sane, nor obtaining informed consent.

I've met various flavours of dominant male, and they all seem like arseholes. To me. But the sub women they're with are fully consenting and obviously seem to like it. To be fair, the sub women annoy me too - but it's a preference. One person's arsehole is another person's strong, powerful man. Each to their own.

Yeah, I agree that some people are drawn to BDSM because they've got problems. Or at least don't fit in to normal conventions. That doesn't make it unhealthy. I think being able to find a like minde

Believing that the definition of marriage that prevailed for 2000 years shouldn't be changed is not the same as not liking gays, as has been pointed out so many times that I can't believe I need to say it.

Why what this guy does in his off hours is any of Drupal's business is a mystery to me. Are they going to investigate all of their employees' personal lives for PC conformity?

It is actually embarassing enough that people that 'think about' / 'write about' or even 'fight for' equality and human rights get defamed as SJWs... and that in a country that invented the term 'political correctness'... just my thoughts.

Is it realy so hard to live and let live with out putting 'brand' labels on other people?

The female equivalent of Larry Garfield's particular sexual interests would be a woman who was a dominatrix. Would you be calling it "tolerating intolerance" to allow a dominatrix to be a Drupal contributor? Would you insist that if a female contributor were found to be a dominatrix, she must be forced out of the project? Would you justify it by telling her, "Sorry for not tolerating misandry"?

Specifically, the community is overwhelmingly women. I know this from first-hand experience (not that you would believe an A/C anyway, but my assertion here is that I have seen this with my own eyes, and am not just making this shit up to troll).

The female-to-male ratio is so high that the women must share their men with other women.

The kicker is....the women only flock to real manly-men. If you don't quite have the build it is possible to make up for that with enough butch in your personality...but the more sensitive guys tend to get snubbed, even by women who have no partner.

I'd say the difference is whether you extend your kink to the rest of the world. If you spend your free time with women who want to be treated like a Gorean slave girl and treat them accordingly, keeping everything fully consensual, that's one thing. If you act like an asshole and misogynist in real life, that's another thing. All I've read of this guy is that he practices certain sexual fantasies that some people would find offensive in real life, and I fail to see what he does in private with people w

>Buytaert claims he did this "because it came to my attention that he holds views that are in opposition with the values of the Drupal project. [...]in which men are inherently superior to women."]

This is crazy. Who cares about his sex life? Aren't we above that type of thing??? Besides, such role-playing sex fantasy has nothing to do with men being "superior" to women, in fact, it is often the other way around and still has nothing to do with "real life".

This is not a social club or religion, it is a set of computer program tools. It would be difference if his CODING or PROJECT philosophy ran contrary to the the group, because that is actually related to the project. Even then there should be some amount of tolerance.

I abhor some of the political correctness going around, but generally I am intolerant of intolerance. Hopefully others in the Drupal project agree.

Exactly. Who cares about his sex life? If getting wrapped in leather and hog tied with a butt plug up his ass is his thing, more power too him. I don't see how anything happening inside his bed room is any of any ones' business.

The way I read Larry Garfield's statement is that he's into Dom/Sub relationships, and his club is as well, and the whole thing is mainly a roleplaying thing for him. I'm pretty sure you also have people in the club that take it way to serious, and probably a lot of sexist assholes too, but the same thing has been true for AD&D or gaming communities as well.

Given the pretty thoughtful nature of Larry's post, and how easy it is to claim a few snippets out of context and paint someone as a mass murderer (or worse, as someone involved in nonstandard sexual activity) I'd go a bit slower on this. I think the Drupal leadership could have been taken in by someone with an axe to grind, someone who doesn't know a thing about BDSM to begin with, abhors the concept, and then found some quotes he could use to hit the victim over the head with. I've seen this happen before in small, close-knit circles. Overreaction is common due to the shock of someone being different from what you thought.

Lord knows I'm not into BDSM, and certainly not a supporter of misogynist fucktards, but this feels way to much like the witch hunt versus gays or pedophiles to me. People had better be pretty careful before they damn someone based on some internet quotes taken out of context. They might regret it later when things become clearer.

Wonder what the women in the group think.. Would honestly be interested in hearing their side.. Or do they have to be submissive to your mindset and not have an opinion on how happy they are with this?
If this is consensual, between adults that may want to think something, and both sides are happy.. I see no harm, as long as neither side are truly suffering and want to get out..
Being intolerant that other think other than you is the path to the great SJW, where everyone is free to think for themselves,

I have no problem whatsoever sitting down with people who think transsexuality is totally unacceptable.That includes a big chunk of my immediate family. I just don't let their problems with it get into my head. So things are okay. They don't tell me to change my views, and I don't tell them to change theirs. That's what mutual respect is all about. If you can only tolerate views that agree with yours, your one intolerant sone-of-a-bitch.

People have the right to disagree with you. And you have the right to call them ignorant fuck-tards. See how it works?

They got Colin Moriarty a couple of weeks ago at Kinda Funny Games too. Trump's election has produced a SJW hysteria where even conventional conservative views are no longer tolerated anywhere in the tech/entertainment industry in particular (or Silicon Valley/Southern California in general). Everyone not fully embracing the SJW agenda is being purged from their jobs. This poor guy got fired just for participating in sex roleplay that the SJW's don't like.

Um, are you claiming that a gorean lifestyle is associated with being a conservative?

No. For all I know, this guy may consider himself a liberal. But the fact that his lifestyle deviated even *slightly* from the rigid SJW orthodoxy was enough to get him purged. He wasn't fired for participating in BDSM and talking about it. He was fired for participating in a specific type of BDSM that involves men subjugating women. If he had been blogging about gay or transsexual BDSM, the same guy who fired him would be likely be celebrating him for his "bravery."

This sort of thing doesn't even warrant being called a "double standard" anymore. It's crossed over into just flat-out political/social persecution. And it's taken on a quasi-religious orthodoxical tone that's scary as fuck.

He wasn't fired for participating in BDSM and talking about it. He was fired for participating in a specific type of BDSM that involves men subjugating women. If he had been blogging about gay or transsexual BDSM, the same guy who fired him would be likely be celebrating him for his "bravery."

No, you're altogether wrong on the details. You really should read the TechCrunch column upon which this/. story is based. It's a (admittedly lengthy) thoughtful, detailed analysis of the acceptablility of the basis on which the decision to fire the guy was based. Rightfully, I think, he concludes that it was a completely unacceptable, star-chamber-style unilateral, decision by the fucktard who made it in COMPLETE contravention of the Drupal community's published, OPEN dispute resolution process.

Just as importantly, it makes the point that the guy did NOT, EVER post any kind of public blog post about the practice or philosphy of the Gorean lifestyle. Instead, he was DOXXED by some shitheel who created an account on a PRIVATE social network of, by, and specifically for Goreans, for the purpose of gaining access to his victim's PRIVATE posts and profile thereon. The TechCrunch writer also makes the rather central point that the victim of this indefensible "process" has NEVER been accused of sexual harassment by ANY member of the Drupal community in the 12 years he has been a major contributor to that community, He has gone to great pains to keep his interest in Goreanism COMPLETELY separate from his fellow members of the Drupal development community. He has worked with female members of that community throughout as peers, and not one of them ever complained about his professionalism in that regard.

He was OUTED by an ASSHOLE, and was FIRED by ANOTHER ASSHOLE, essentially for THOUGHTCRIME.

Personally, I think he's not the one who should be "asked to resign" over this issue.

It isn't about BDSM. It's about his beliefs in the hierarchy of men and women - i.e., that men are evolutionarily superior and predisposed to lead; women are happiest as slaves or at least subjugated to men. Nobody cares less about the whips and chains, we've all tried spanking.... things...

Is this going to be the D&D moral panic all over again? One can roleplay things one does not actually believe. Heck, whoever invented the AD&D take on Drow was doing both sorts of roleplaying simultaneously - how's that for efficiency.

If not, it's his business alone. I can't in good conscience condemn a man for his thoughts, dreams, ideas and wishes. Mostly 'cause you can't even imagine how often I had thoughts that start with "If I could wipe out the life on this planet..."

People should be free to believe and fantasize as they want. No one should be excluded for have different views. It's too much of a slippery slope. People should only be accountable for their actions and to a limited extent their ability to reasonably interact with others by the established consensus of a common code of conduct.

Just because a belief isn't from an established religion doesn't mean it can be arbitrarily discounted by the majority. There is way too much of this Social Justice bullshit going o

Open Source has plenty of infighting over belief systems. But this? Say what? We are talking about an excellent developer\contributor. So what if he is into that style of BDSM. So are the adult consenting women. What exactly is Dries trying to communicate here? Intolerance? Is he a Christian? If so, so what. This is the height of dumnfuckery and makes the whole project look bad. How does making the project look bad fit in with values of the project? Because that is what Dries is doing.

Gor is both a lifestyle and a philosophy to some. To others it's just a way to enjoy BDSM or power exchange sex play. It's founded on a set of books written by John Norman that state repeatedly that pretty much all women secretly want to be enslaved and brutally raped by a Real Man. This is at direct odds with the "Safe, Sane Consensual" rule espoused by most power exchange communities. To truly and deeply participate in a Gorean lifestyle is to utterly disavow gender equality, at least in those circles.

Well, on the bright side, this tells me to stay far, far away from the Drupal project and anything it produces. They're far more interested in pushing their political agenda (or virtue signalling, at least) than putting out quality software, which is a rather massive strike against trusting their code, particularly in an era where security is so important and many are willing to go to extreme lengths to achieve their political goals.

Easy decision: is it legal? If not, let him face justice. Otherwise, it looks like a ban for opinions. Fine, but Drupal will have to set up a list of allowed or forbidden opinions. That will not be pretty.

So the guy's a pervert: does that mean his code quit working? Is he trying to fuck other contributors? Has he done anything to anyone without their consent?

I've worked with plenty of people in my time who are into things that I don't approve of, from voting for socialists to trying to be Heinlein characters, but if they don't bring it to the office, it's none of my business. That goes double for an open-source project where they're donating their work.

Enough with the goddamned neo-puritans. There's work to be done, for fuck's sake.

If he wasn't attempting to impose his preferences and was instead having a sex life with consenting partners and a consenting community, what business is it of the project or Buytaert?

There's a whole world of sexual preferences out there that may or may not offend some part of the community. Furries? Diapers/"adult infants?" Feet? Dominance/Submission (which I think is distinct from BDSM)? Homosexuality? Poly?

Heck, I'm not into that BDSM and even I know that there are wide variations even in the BDSM community, some of which Buytaert probably wouldn't even care about. Just offhand I know that there are people into spanking, piercings/body mods (is this tied in?), rope bondage, and probably things I've never heard of or considered along with the "traditional" portrayal of BDSM with restraints and floggers, crops etc.

I'm a vanilla white boy from the midwestern suburbs, but I'm pretty sure that taken as a whole those "alternative sexuality" communities are overall much more accepting of kinks (YKIOKBINMK) and also more sensitive to people being coerced or (involuntarily) mistreated than almost all of the Good Citizens that I went to High School with.

It's wrong for (white) men to subjugate women, demean them, or harass them in the office.

Yes, period.

Except if you are into BDSM involving fantasies of sexual slavery of women. Or you're a muslim. Or non-white.

What you do on your own time with willing participants is your deal. Don't assume all, most or many people you interact with are willing participants. Acting out your sex fantasies on strangers usually gets you in trouble, not sure why this would be any different except less trouble.

What you do on your own time with willing participants is your deal. Don't assume all, most or many people you interact with are willing participants. Acting out your sex fantasies on strangers usually gets you in trouble, not sure why this would be any different except less trouble.

He wasn't fired for talking about his sex life. He was fired because he was participating in sexual roleplay that offended the SJW orthodoxy.

If this guy had been talking about transsexual/gay/bi-sexual BDSM , the same people who fired him would be cheering him on and calling him brave for being so open about it.

Except he was outed by a few SJWs in the Drupal community. They referred to his profile, which was on an account required private server as evidence that he was 'a bad man'. He was accused of being sexist and discriminatory towards women, despite his being an author of the founding rules that said no discrimination based on sex was allowable, and despite female colleagues that worked with him stating that he was helpful and agnostic towards gender, treating everyone equally.
This is pure SJW targetting an

There was a gorean fellow a few years ago who had a tendency to leave bodies in sealed drums in storage lockers... apparently un-willing participants

Sometimes it is best to leave things in the closet and not chat it up in the workplace

Uh, I'm not quite sure how to parse your post.

On the one hand it sounds like you think that it's a good idea for people's sex-lives to remain private. On the other hand it almost seems like you're implying that the bodies sealed in drums thing just should remain undisclosed.

Indeed. Like during some of the roadside interviews on the show Cops. When I find myself yelling, "Nope, this line of work isn't suited for you", at the people on the television, like a Senorita watching "Telenovelas"... when the drug runners get pulled over on the highway with a tail light out, pot smoke in the cab, and kilos of cocaine in the trunk.

You owe it to yourself to resist the temptation at the water cooler to share what you did with the bodies last night.

I've always had the attitude that if one is to break the law, break only one law at a time.

Your drug runners example, with the money involved in the illegal drug trade there's no excuse to use a moron with a poorly-maintained car to transport the drugs, unless there's a specific reason to do so. Makes one wonder if there was an ulterior motive for a choice so stupid and blatant as someone that's going to get high while driving a car that has a legitimate excuse for being pulled over while carrying possibly

There are plenty of fantasies that people have that would give them a heart attack if they ever actually got the chance to go through it. Being able to fly like superman? Nice fantasy, but imagine how someone with a fear of heights (or even just a normal person) was standing at the end of a cliff and saying "I can fly - but NO F'ING WAY".

Or fantasizing about rushing into a burning building to save people, or confronting a bomb-toting, ak-47 shooting terrorist, but they know full well they would freeze up i

You're making some idiotic assumptions about what BDSM is. I'm a female bondage model the shit you're saying is just plain wrong. My girlfriend is also into bondage and nothing we've ever done has involved any of the bullshit you spew.

What's with bringing up minority races? What does that have to do with anything? You wouldn't happen to be a Trump supporter that pretends to not be racist, would you?